Abstracts of the International Mine Water Conference 19

th
23
rd
October 2009
Proceedings ISBN Number: 978-0-9802623-5-3 Pretoria, South Africa
Produced by: Document Transformation Technologies cc Conference organised by: Cilla Taylor Conferences

URANIUM POLLUTION OF WATER RESOURCES IN MINED-OUT AND
ACTIVE GOLDFIELDS OF SOUTH AFRICA -
A CASE STUDY IN THE WONDERFONTEINSPRUIT CATCHMENT ON
EXTENT AND SOURCES OF U-CONTAMINATION AND ASSOCIATED
HEALTH RISKS
FRANK WINDE
North-West University, School of Environmental Sciences and Development, Private Bag X6001,
Potchefstroom, 2520, Republic of South Africa
ABSTRACT
Even though mining-related uranium pollution in the Wonderfonteinspruit (WFS) has been an ongoing concern since
the mid 1960s, media attention recently increased considerably focussing on pollution-related health risks that unsettle
the general public. In view of recent findings that uranium (U) might be more toxic than previously thought such
concerns need to be addressed. This even more so as South Africa has embarked on a nuclear expansion program aimed,
amongst others, at extending mining and processing of uranium (U). This paper explores the impacts mining over the
past decade had on U-pollution of water resources in the WFS catchment. The analysis is mainly based on close to
3400, mostly unpublished, values on U-concentrations of water samples gathered between 1997 and 2008. Results
indicate that U-levels in water resources of the whole catchment increased markedly since 1997 even though U-loads
emitted by some large gold mines in the Far West Rand were reduced. This apparent contradiction is explained by the
contribution of highly polluted water decanting from the flooded mine void in the West Rand. Over the reference
period, an average of some 3,5 t of dissolved U have been released into the fluvial system from monitored discharge
points alone. However, since WFS dries up well before it joins the Mooi River this U-load does not usually impact on
the water supply system of downstream Potchefstroom directly. It may, however, indirectly reach Potchefstroom since
much of the water from the WFS recharges the underlying karst aquifer of the Boskop Turffontein Compartment (BTC)
as the single most important water resource for Potchefstroom. Compared to 1997 groundwater in the BTC showed the
highest relative increase in U-levels of the whole WFS catchment resulting in some 800 kg of U per year flowing into
Boskop Dam as Potchefstrooms main water reservoir. Of particular concern is the fact that U-levels in the WFS are
comparable to those detected in the Northern Cape (South Africa) which had been geostatistically linked to abnormal
haematological values related to increased incidences of leukaemia observed in residents of the area.
Keywords: Uranium, water pollution, load, gold mining, karst, dolomite, health risks, Wonderfonteinspruit, West Rand,
Far West Rand
1. INTRODUCTION: DEATH IN THE WATER
With the above headline on its front page the SOWETAN, in J uly 2007, drew the attention of its readership to the
radioactive water pollution of the Wonderfonteinspruit (WFS). Together with well over 50 articles which appeared
between 2007 and 2008 on this topic alone covering double, full and front pages of local and national newspapers, the
article illustrates the degree of media attention pollution of the WFS received. The increased awareness on potential
dangers associated with U in South Africa coincides with a globally renewed interest in uranium as a climate-neutral
source of energy fuelled by an ever widening gap between increasing demand and constant supply. Consequently, the
U-spot price rose tenfold between 2003 and 2007 triggering large-scale exploration efforts to find new U-deposits in
Africa and southern Africa in particular. During more than a century of gold mining in the catchment of the
Wonderfonteinspruit (WFS) deep level gold mining brought more than 100000 t of U
3
O
8
from depths of up to 3000 m,
to the densely populated surface areas of the West Rand (WR) and Far West Rand (FWR) (Winde in press a and b).
Since 1952, U-producing gold mines in South Africa exported a total of some 240000 t of U more than double that
amount (ca. 600000 t) is estimated to still be contained in gold mining tailings covering some 400 km in the
Witwatersrand basin. These slimes dams and associated infrastructure such as return water dams, pipelines,
metallurgical plants etc. together with unmined uraniferous ore in mine voids constitute a multitude of sources from
which U migrates, mostly uncontrolled, into the environment. In addition to wind and water erosion of slimes dams
transporting uraniferous tailings particles into adjacent areas, the chemical leaching of U from tailings particles and
subsequent, waterborne transport as a dissolved phase into subjacent aquifers and nearby streams often constitutes the
single largest source of mining-related water pollution. In mined out areas such as the West Rand and Central Rand of
the Witwatersrand basin water flowing out of flooded mine voids may act as another major source of U-pollution
affecting surface- and groundwater.
772
With evidence mounting that the radioactive heavy metal U may pose a more severe health risk than previously thought
even at comparably low concentrations, a thorough analyses of the extent of U-pollution in the densely populated
catchment of the WFS is needed. This paper attempts to provide a comprehensive overview on available data in order to
quantify the extent of U-pollution in the WFS catchment and gain perspective for assessing possibly associated health
risks. The focus is on the contamination of surface and groundwater as characterized by data from largely unpublished
studies and includes first order approximations of associated U-loads in the WFS. The catchment of the WFS is shown
in (Fig. 1).
27 E
27 30
26 30 S
28E
26 S
Roodepoort
Randfontein
Krugersdorp
M
o
o
i

R
i
v
e
r
Klerkskraal
Dam
Potchefstroom
Khutsong
1m - pipeline
W
F
S
Donaldson d
Welverdiend
Boskop
Dam
Potchefstroom
Dam
Karst spring (flowing/ dried up)
Carleton-
ville
G
M
in
n
e
b
ro
n

e
y
e
0 5 10km 0 5 10km
Outcrop of full dolomitic compartment (NAME)
BTC
NN
Kagiso
dry stream bed
Gold Mine (active and decommissioned) Gold Mine (active and decommissioned)
Perennial/ non-perennial stream
WFS catchment border
West Rand
goldfield
Far West Rand goldfield
Bl yvoour./
Doornfnt
Driefontein
Kloof
Libanon GM
Venterspost
BANK
Outcrop of dewatered dolomitic compartments (NAME)
OBER-
HOLZER
BANK
BOSKOP-
TURFFONTEIN
ZUURBEKOM
REGM
West Wits Cons
Western Area
N-shaft
South Deep
Rand Water
pumping station
NUFCOR
Elandskraal
VENTERS
POST
GEMSB.FNT
Westonaria
Sterkfontein
(Cradleof
Humankind)
Twee Loopiespruit
REGM
C2H152 DWAF monitoring station (code no) C2H152 DWAF monitoring station (code no)
Wetland Wetland
Discharge of mine effluents (via canal/ pipeline)
H
a
r
r
y

s

d
.
P
a
d
d
a
d
.
Turffontein
eyes
A
C
D
V
D
1
+
2
TD 1+2
Bovenste Oog
Klerkskraal
eyes
Dam (not in proportion) (full/ dry)
HOLFONTEIN
STEENKOPPIES
C2H069
O
b
e
r
h
.

e
y
e
Bank eye
VP eye
Diamond
mine
C2H152
C2H153
C2H025

Figure 1. The Study area (VD Visser dams, ACD Andries Coetzees dam, d. dam)
A detailed description of the relevant hydrological and geohydrological features of the study area are provided in Winde
(in press a and b).
2. U-POLLUTION OF STREAM WATER IN THE WFS
Underlying data: The most extensive study on waterborne U-pollution in the WFS catchment conducted to date is
IWQS (1999) which is based on several hundreds of water samples taken between J anuary and December 1997 at 28
different sites across the study area. Taking IWQS (1999) as a baseline study on the extent of U-pollution of water
resources in the WFS area, a second set of data sources is used to characterise subsequent changes. The DWAF started
monitoring U-levels soon after completion of the IWQS study (DWAF 2004). For the upper part of the WFS these data
are complemented by a more recent water monitoring program of Harmony Gold Mine (Dorling 2008). In the lower
part of the WFS the monitoring program of the Blyvooruitzicht GM complements monthly U-data from DWAF with
weekly U-analyses (Blyvooruitzicht 2008). A third monitoring program is conducted by the Potchefstroom municipality
focusing on the lower WFS and the Mooi River in the vicinity of the municipal water works. For some of the monitored
sites U-data gathered by various ad hoc investigations are also included (Barthel 2007, Coetzee et al. 2006, Coetzee et
al. 2002, Winde 2000 & 2008). For calculating U-loads gauging records of the DWAF could be used for some of the
sites while for others alternatives sources and methods had to be applied. A comprehensive overview of the data used
and an assessment of their consistency and comparability is provided in Winde (in press a and b).
773
Extent of U-pollution in 1997: Fig. 2 depicts the average U-concentration for different sampling points along the WFS
and selected mine effluent discharge points for the period J anuary to December 1997.
to Vaal River
W
F
S
M
o
o
i

R
i
v
e
r
Rietspruit
Twee Loopie
Spr. East
Twee Loopie
Spr. West
GMB
Boskop
Dam
Potch Dam
Potchefstroom
Klerkskraal
Dam
P
a
d
d
a
D
.

A

B
a
i
l
e
y

N
R
D
o
n
a
l
d
s
o
n

D
a
m
A
t
t
e
n
u
a
t
i
o
n

D
a
m
L
a
n
c
a
s
t
e
r

D
T
u
d
o
r

D
Robinson
Lake
P Wright D
Sterkfnt.
caves
Boskop
Turffnt. C.
Oberh. C.
Bank C.
Ventp
C.
V
e
n
t
b
o
k
C
.
W-Gemsb C.
E-Gemsb C.
E-Zuurb C.
W
-
Z
u
u
r
b
C
.
R
i
e
t

S
.
M
i
d
d
l
e
v
l
e
i
S
.
RW
pumping
Dolomitic compartment (full)
Dolomitic compartment (dewatered)
Holfontein C.
Steenkoppies C.
Dolomitic spring (active)
Dolomitic spring (dry due to dewatering)
T
u
r
f
f
o
n
t
.

1
+
2
O
h
z

E
y
e
B
a
n
k

E
y
e
V
e
n
t
p
E
y
e
Klip R. Eye
Bovenste Oog
Maloneys Eye
Not to scale
H
a
r
r
y
s

D
a
m
C2H011 GMB eye - dam w all
(n=31; Ff =5)
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[g
/l]
C2H013 upper Tur f nt n. eye
(n=31; Ff =18)
0,0
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
7,0
8,0
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
aq
[g
/l]
0,9
7,0
0,5
2,1
Driefontein GM
Doornfontein GM
C2H069 WFS at Welverdient
(n=31; Ff=4)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q [g
/l]
38
68
156
406
C2H080 Outfl 1m pipe
(n=31; Ff=4)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
aq
[
g
/l]
C2H152 WFS at Turk shaft
(n=31; Ff =4)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
aq [g/l]
4,2
48,0
2,7
9,5
C2H152
C2H080
C2H013
C2H069
C2H011
U-av
U-max
C2H172 Bovens t e Oog
(n=29; Ff =23)
0,0
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
7,0
8,0
9,0
10,0
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[g
/l]
C2H172 (n=29)
C2H172 Bovens t e Oog
(n=29; Ff =23)
0,0
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
7,0
8,0
9,0
10,0
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[g
/l]
C2H172 (n=29)
(n=31)
(n=31)
0,8
9,1
C2H154 WFS at Door nkop bridge
(n=31; Ff =6)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[
g
/l]
C2H154 (n=31)
C2H154 WFS at Door nkop bridge
(n=31; Ff =6)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[
g
/l]
C2H154 (n=31)
(n=31)
(n=31)
C2H160 Door nfnt GM fiss water 3 shaft
(n=23; Ff=33)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[
g
/l]
C2H160 (n=23)
C2H160 Door nfnt GM fiss water 3 shaft
(n=23; Ff=33)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[
g
/l]
C2H160 (n=23)
C2H156 W-Df nt c anal above set t l ponds
(n=31; Ff =6)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[
g
/l]
C2H156 (n=31)
(n=31)
C2H174 Pot ch Dam - canal t o w at er w or k s
(n=23; Ff =123)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[
g
/l]
C2H174 (n=23)
C2H174 Pot ch Dam - canal t o w at er w or k s
(n=23; Ff =123)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
31. Dez 19. Feb 10. Apr 30. Mai 19. J ul 07. Sep 27. Okt 16. Dez
1997
U
a
q
[
g
/l]
C2H174 (n=23)
369
2576
217
607
31
58
1m
pipeline
60
100
C
2
H
1
7
5
79
160
N
C2H175
C2H162
F
a
r
W
e
s
t R
a
n
d
W
e
s
t

R
a
n
d
Average U238 conc. in water [g/l]
Max. U238 conc. in water [g/l]
Sampling site (code)
(n=30) Number of sample taken
W
on
d
e
rfon
te
in
sp
ruit
C
2
H
1
6
1
19
104
Data source: IWQS (1997)
Discharge of effluent fromgold mine (GM)
Winde 2009

Figure 2. Schematic representation of average and maximum U-concentration in water as well as its temporal variability
for selected sampling sites in the Wonderfonteinspruit catchment based on raw data generated during the IWQS (1999)
study (raw data are not contained in cited report and had to be retrieved separately)
U-levels along the course of the WFS display distinct differences. By far the highest in-stream U-concentrations occur
at site C2H152 right in the head waters illustrating the higher potential of the (older) WR goldfield for direct stream
pollution. Owing to dilution by large volumes of mainly U-free sewage effluents the U-level in the WFS drops
significantly before the stream enters the 1m pipeline.
After receiving discharge from Driefontein GM at the end of the 1m pipeline the U-level in the WFS doubles and
further increases with effluents from two more gold mines (Blyvooruitzicht and Doornfontein) entering the WFS via
canals. With 79 g U/l the average U-level in the WFS at the outflow of the catchment exceeds the SA drinking water
limit for most of the time. Compared to the regional natural background of 0,8 g U/l measured at Bovenste Oog
(C2H172), a dolomitic spring regarded as largely unaffected by gold mining, this suggests a mining-related increase of
U-levels by a factor of 100.
While concentration values are commonly used to assess, for example, potential health effects they are not sufficient to
quantify (long-term) impacts on the receiving environment. This is particular true for discharges containing non-
biodegradable contaminants such as U and other heavy metals which tend to accumulate in sediments, soil etc. through
secondary enrichment. In order to quantify the potential of U for such off-site enrichment the total mass of discharged U
(U-load) needs to be determined. Loads associated with the above discussed U-concentrations are displayed in Fig. 3.
774
1
m
p
ip
e
lin
e
Canal to Potch
water works
Upper Turffontein
Eye
Gerhard
Minnebron Eye
n
o
n
-
p
e
r
e
n
n
i
a
l

M
o
o
i

R
i
v
e
r
M
o
o
i

R
i
v
e
r
Discharge from active gold mines into the WFS
West Rand
8
156
8
156
Ml/d
ppb
Ml/d
ppb
av. flow [Ml/day]
av. U-conc. In water [g/l] (IWQS 1997)
31
38
31
38
71
31
71
31
44
79
44
79
40
19
40
19
60
0,5
60
0,5
200
2,7
200
2,7
W
F
S
C2H152
C2H025
C2H080
106
60
106
60
C2H157
C2H069
C2H161
50
0,8
50
0,8
C2H162
C2H172
10
4,2
10
4,2
to Vaal River
kg/a
Load of dissolved U in kg per year in 1995
388 388
430 430
804 804
2323 2323
1270 1270
15 15
273 273
11 11
197 197
15 15
Far West Rand
Dolomtic karst springs
Klerkskraal dam
Boskop dam
Bovenste Oog
C
2
H
1
5
4
C2H172
C2H152
C
2
H
0
8
0
C
2
H
1
7
5
stream
N
Not to scale
C
2
H
0
6
9
C
2
H
0
6
1
C2H011
C2H162
C2H174
C2H069
DWAF code of sampling points
Driefontein GM
Blyvooruitzicht GM
18
0,9
18
0,9
77
C2H013
Winde 2009
Potch dam
5
369
5
369
674 674
35
217
35
217
2774 2774
C2H160
C2H156
d
ry
O
u
t
f
l
o
w

1
m

p
i
p
e
O
u
t
f
l
o
w

H
a
r
r
y

s

a
m
Inflow
Boskop dam
W
F
S

a
t

M
u
i
s
k
r
a
a
l

d
i
r
t

r
o
a
d

c
u
l
v
e
t
s
Bridge downstr.
of Cook SD
above settling ponds
At Doornfnt #3 shaft
G
a
u
g
i
n
g

s
t
a
t
i
o
n

u
p
s
t
r
.

A

C
o
e
t
z
e
e

D
a
m
downstr.
Lancaster dam
Venterspost (Kloof) GM
32
25
C2H171
Fissure water
32
25
245 245
35
126
35
126
1611
C2H063
below settling
ponds

Figure 3. Estimated loads of dissolved U (i.e. not including U bound to particulate matter such as suspended sediment,
spilled and eroded tailings or windblown tailings dust)
in the WFS based on U-concentrations measured in 1997 (IWQS 1999)
While based on U-concentration the WR appears to be the main source of stream pollution (the highest U-levels are
found in the upper reaches of the WFS) this changes when U-loads are used as base of comparison. Load values
indicate that mines in the FWR release significantly more U into the WFS than all sources in the WR together (Fig. 3).
Considering only U released from the three monitored mine discharge points in the FWR (there are others which are not
monitored or monitored but not included here) a total load of over 3,6 t U per year was discharged into the river. While
being transported in the river parts of the dissolved U are attenuated in sediments especially those of shallow farm dams
where specific conditions promote above average U-immobilization as pointed out by Winde (2006). However, such
quasi-natural U-removal contributes only marginally to the general decrease of the U-load observed between Harrys
dam (C2H75) and gauging station C2H069 that amounts to almost 1800 kg U per year (2323 kg/a leaving Harrys damplus the
674 kg/a the streamreceives fromBlyvooruitzicht GM) (Fig. 3). Most of the loss is due to a significant reduction in flow (from
some 106 Ml/d at Harrys dam to an average of 44 Ml/d at C2H069) rather than decreasing U-concentration. In the
absence of large-scale water abstraction the cause of this drastic flow reduction still needs to be researched. Especially
since the extent of stream loss appears to have increased in recent times. In 2005, close to 90% of the water (89 Ml/d)
disappeared between Harrys dam and C2H069 compared to 60 Ml/d in 1997.
1

Changes in U-pollution levels since 1997: Data from Dorling (2008) indicate a significant rise in average U-levels at
the outflow of the Donaldson Dam, representing an increase by over 60 %. Of particular concern is the drastic increase
of the U-maximum exceeding 1997 levels by an order of magnitude. In view of the rather large dilution capacity of the
dam (maximum storage capacity of 1000 Ml) such U-peaks are indicative of large pulses of polluted water moving
through the dam and subsequently into the 1m-pipeline. Another increase of U-levels appears at C2H023 located in the
upper reaches of the WFS where the average in-stream concentration more than doubled between 1997 and 2000 (from
156 g/l to 319 g/l). A similar trend is noticeable for the U-maximum which increased from 406 g/l to 705 g/l
exceeding the TWQR for irrigation water by a factor of over 70 and for drinking water by a factor of 10. A possible
cause for this drastically increased U-influx is the discharge of large volumes of semi-and untreated water decanting
from the flooded mine void of the West Rand R (the void is also referred to as Western Basin). Following a DWAF
directive this water was diverted from the point of decant located outside the WFS catchment via a former mine water
reservoir known as Robinson lake into the WFS. Between J anuary 2004 and May 2005 the average U-concentration in
Robinson lake was 1219 g/l with a detected maximum of 3100 g/l (Dorling 2008). The increase of U-levels in water

1
Considering that sewage works at Carletonville and Khutsong add additional volumes of sewage effluents to the WFS between Harrys damand
C2H069 the actual loss is even higher.
775
at the inflow of the 1m-pipeline is, for some reason, not reflected at the outflow of the pipe. In fact, the average U-
concentration at the outflow decreased by almost 20 %. It must be noted, however, that the DWAF data end in J anuary
2004, possibly before the decant water was diverted into the WFS. Since the diversion of decant water into the WFS
was later abandoned, samples taken by the mentioned studies (December 2006 and early 2008) might well have missed
previous decant-related U-peaks. For sampling sites located further downstream the trend of slightly decreasing average
U-levels continues including C2H069 for which a comparably large set of data is available. DWAF data suggest that the
average U-level dropped by almost 40 %. Comparing this with the more recent, high-frequency sampling data from
Blyvooruitzicht GM for A Coetzees Dam, which represents more or less the same water, confirms this drop of average
U-levels even though the reduction is significantly smaller (11 % instead of 40 %). Still, with an average concentration
of 71 g/l U, the WFS at the outflow of mining areas continues to exceed SA-guideline values
While U-levels in the lower WFS might have been more or less constant over the past 12 years or so, this seems to be
different in case of the dolomitic groundwater in the Boskop Turffontein Compartment (BTC). Issued from two karst
springs known as upper and lower Turffontein eyes the groundwater allows perennial stream flow to resume in the
lowest reach after the WFS dries up some distance upstream (Fig. 1). A third karst spring, the largest of the three, is
located outside the WFS catchment and known as Gerhard Minnebron (GMB) eye. While in 1997 all springs displayed
U-levels close to the natural background concentrations later rose significantly. Rising U-levels also occurred
downstream of the two springs increasing the average U-concentration at Boskop Dam by almost five times (from 2,7
g/l to 11 g/l). Of particular concern is the comparably high U-maximum of 142 g/l which exceeds the 1997-value by
almost 16 times. A similar trend of rising U-levels is evident for the Potchefstroom dam where the average U-
concentration at the water works inlet rose more than 300% (from 4,2 g/l to 14 g/l). Associated changes in U-loads
between 1997 and the post-1998 period are depicted in Fig. 4.
1
m
p
ip
e
lin
e
To Potch water supply
Upper Turffontein
Eye
Gerhard
Minnebron Eye
n
o
n
-
p
e
r
e
n
n
i
a
l

M
o
o
i

R
i
v
e
r
M
o
o
i

R
i
v
e
r
West Rand
Discharge from active gold mines into the WFS
Ml/d
ppb
Ml/d
ppb
average flow [Megalitre per day]
average U-conc. in water [g/l] (italic- sources other than DWAF)
80
34
80
34
143
26
143
26
20
57
20
57
40
13
40
13
51
2,3
51
2,3
200
11
200
11
W
F
S
C2H025
C2H080
175
50
175
50
C2H157
C2H069
C2H161
50
0,8
50
0,8
C2H011
C2H172
10
14
10
14
to Vaal River
U-load difference [kg/a] (=post 1998 -1997),
(+load increased; - load decreased)
F
a
r

W
e
s
t

R
a
n
d
Dolomtic karst springs
Klerkskraal
dam
Boskop dam
Bovenste Oog
Receiving stream
N
Not to scale
C
2
H
0
6
9
C
2
H
1
7
5
C
2
H
0
8
0
C
2
H
1
5
4
C2H152
C2H172
C
2
H
0
6
1
C2H011
C2H162
C2H174
C2H069
DWAF code for sampling points
Driefontein GM
Blyvooruitzicht GM
Cooke #1
effluent
18
14
18
14
C2H013
Winde 2009
Potch dam
5
148
5
148
35
105
35
105
C2H160 C2H156
d
ry
O
u
t
f
l
o
w

1
m

p
i
p
e
O
u
t
f
l
o
w

H
a
r
r
y

s

d
a
m
Inflowbridge
Boskop dam
W
F
S

a
t

M
u
is
k
r
a
a
l

d
i
r
t

r
o
a
d

c
u
l
v
e
t
s
At Doornfnt #3 shaft
G
a
u
g
i
n
g

s
t
a
t
i
o
n

u
p
s
t
r
.

o
f

A

C
o
e
t
z
e
e

D
a
m
793
+405
793
+405
993
+563
993 993
+563
1358
+554
1358
+554
1342
-1432
1342
-1432
3196
+873
3196
+873
Venterspost (Kloof)
GM
15
159
15
159
871 871
Decanting mine
void water
32
25
32
25
8
319
8
319
O
u
t
f
l
o
w

D
o
n

D
a
m
100
62
100
62
1607
+1191
1607 1607
+1191
15
0
15
0
270
- 404
270
- 404
425
-845
425
-845
95
+88
95
+88
43
+33
43
+33
803
+606
803
+606
51
+36
51
+36
190
- 83
190
- 83
793
+104
793
+104
C2H171
Fissure water
35
86
35
86
1099
-511
1099
-511
C2H063
292
+47
292 292
+47
U-load [kg/a] (=post 1998)
15
1219
15
1219
6679 6679
S
to
ra
g
e
/ p
la
n
t
S
e
ttlin
g
p
o
n
d
s

Figure 4. U-loads for selected sampling sites in the WFS catchment post 1998 and load changes since 1997
While U-loads at some sampling points declined since 1997 (negative values) they increased at others (positive values)
(Fig. 4). Fluvially transported U reaching the Potchefstroom area via the Mooi River increased to 606 kg/a (Fig. 4,
C2H162). This increase is mainly attributable to a significant rise in U-loads emitted by the WR goldfield which
increased almost four fold from 430 kg to 1,6 t per year (Fig. 4). A large part of this increase is presumably caused by
the discharge of considerable volumes of partly treated mine water from the flooded Western Basin, which carries an U-
load of close to 7 tons per year out of the mine void. In contrast to the significant increase of the U-load imported from
the upper catchment, U-loads emitted by major discharging mines in the FWR decreased considerably from a approx.
3,7 t in 1997 to 1,9 t for the period 1998-2008 of which only some 87 % (1661 kg) actually reach the WFS. The
remainder appears to be trapped in settling ponds of Driefontein GM (243 kg/a). Compared to the 1997 data, the
removal rate of the settling ponds appears to have significantly decreased from 1163 kg U/a to only 243 kg/a. While
reasons for this drop are unknown, Driefontein GM (according to DWAF 2004 data) reduced the total U-load
discharged into the WFS by approximately one third compared to 1997. An even larger reduction is observed at
776
Blyvooruitzicht GM where U-loads decreased by 60 % (from 674 kg/a to 270 kg/a) over the same period (Fig. 4).
For the reach of the WFS that runs on the non-dewatered BTC from Harrys dam (near the outflow of the 1m-pipeline)
to below Welverdiend, a similar situation as in 1997 prevails. Again large amounts of U are lost from the stream over
this stretch, this time amounting to over 3 t per year (3196 kg/a at C2H175 +27 kg/a fromBlyvooruitzicht GM 424 kg/a still passing
C2H069) (Fig. 4). The highest (relative) increase of U-loads, however, occurs in dolomitic spring water from the BTC
which, in 1997, was still largely unpolluted. U-levels in the upper Turffontein eye, for example, rose by more than an
order of magnitude. While the absolute mass of U injected into the fluvial system is still comparably small (88 kg/a),
the increasing trend of U-levels is of concern.
3. U-TOXICITY: LATEST FINDINGS
Like most non-essential heavy metals
2
, U is chemo-toxic to humans and has been reported to cause irreversible damage
to kidneys (nephrotoxic) if consumed above certain concentrations (UBA 2005, WISE 2001). Schnug and Hahneklaus
(2008) point to possible links between elevated U-levels in increasingly consumed mineral water and the prevalence of
kidney cancer. Exposing rats to uranium in drinking water IRSN (2005) identified that, apart from kidneys, also the
brain is targeted by U-toxicity. being possibly as sensitive as the kidneys. In how far such neurotoxic effects may cause
behavioural changes is still unclear. In this context it is however interesting to note longstanding rumours in the gold
mining town of Carletonville (South Africa) linking U-polluted drinking water to an abnormally high number of
children with learning problems in a mining community that relied on pumped groundwater from the mine (Tempelhoff
2007, Stoch L pers. commun.).
IRSN (2005) and Henner (2008) demonstrated that U is also genotoxic causing damage to the DNA of exposed fish.
Investigating a community living in a uranium mining area William et al. (1995) found such effects also in humans.
Using algae Henner (2008) found that U-toxicity increases if Cd is present. As part of investigating possible links
between armour-penetrating ammunition containing depleted uranium (DU) and severe health problems observed in
DU-exposed soldiers (collectively known as Gulf War Syndrome), Busby (2005) proposes a new mechanism
explaining why and how the even less radioactive DU (approx. 60% of the original radioactivity of U
nat
) is able to
damage DNA
3
. Recently Raymond-Wish et al. (2007) added U to the long list of known endocrine disruptive
compounds (EDC), which rapidly emerge as a major threat to water quality worldwide. Mimicking the effects of
estrogen in the body, U could possibly increase the risk of fertility problems and reproductive cancers at levels so far
regarded as safe in drinking water.
A major source of uncertainty is the incomplete scientific knowledge for setting U-limits, especially regarding the
effects of chronic exposure to low concentrations typically found in the environment. So far almost all U-limits in
drinking water are based on data gathered after short-term exposure of animals (experiments). For higher dosages of
radioactivity this is supplemented by data from exposure of humans resulting from nuclear accidents and life span
studies on the Hiroshima atomic bomb survivors (J acobi and Roth 1995). Specifically addressing this gap the French
research initiative Environhom for the first time in radioprotection demonstrated that biokinetics and toxicity of
radionuclides after chronic exposure may not be simply extrapolated from data acquired after acute exposure and ...
(results) ... showed that many deterministic effects may be induced after ingestion of small amounts of radionuclides ...
(IRSN 2005). The limited reliability of existing models is illustrated by the fact that after incorporating additional
epidemiological data on effects of internal alpha emitters J acobi et al. (1997) found a 20 70 times higher risk of
contracting liver cancer from occupational U-exposure than indicated in their previous study, which only used
extrapolated data from the atomic bomb survivor study.
The U-limit of the WHO as well as those of the US-EPA, Health Canada and the Umweltbundesamt (Federal
Environmental Bureau) in Germany are all based on the nephrotoxicity of U observed in two 1998-studies exposing rats
and rabbits for up to 91 days to uranium contaminated drinking water
4
(von Soosten 2008, WISE 2001). This approach
leaves uncertainty not only regarding the transferability of results from rats/ rabbits to humans and effects of speziations
other than uranyl nitrate but also regarding the impacts of exposure times exceeding a three months period. The
previous WHO limit for U in drinking water (2 g/l) is now proposed by the Bundesanstalt fr Risikobewertung
(Federal Institute for Risk Evaluation) in Germany for mineral waters used to prepare formula-based baby food, while
for drinking water the Umweltbundesamt (German Federal Environmental Bureau) proposes a limit of 10 g/l for life-
long exposure to be legislated in the European Union (EU) (von Soosten 2008). Both values are significantly lower than

2
In contrast to essential heavy metals such as Zn which are needed for the human metabolismand only toxic above certain threshold levels, no such
benefits of U exist. Ideally U and other non-essential metals and half metals such as mercury, arsenic or cadmiumfor example should thus not be in the
drinking water at all. However, owing to their natural abundance in the environment, the associated costs to completely remove all potentially dangerous
metals would render tap water unaffordable to many.
3
The proposed mechanismis based on the observation that adsorption of natural background radiation is proportional to the fourth power of the atomic
number of an element. Thus, DNA contaminated with an element of high atomic number such as U, absorbs several tens of thousands of times more
gamma radiation than uncontaminated DNA. Based on this observation, Busby and Schnug (2008) suggest that the above normal adsorption rate
explains why U and other elements with high atomnumbers are not naturally used as building blocks in organisms.
4
Based on this a tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 6 g/kg bodyweight per day was defined by the WHO and subsequently reduced to 0,6 g/kg x d to
allow for variations in vulnerability of exposed populations i.e. between adults and children.
777
the one of the USA (EPA: 30 g/l) or South Africa (70 g/l) as two major U-producers
5
. Preceding a globally renewed
interest in U mining the WHO, in J anuary 2003, increased the U-limit from 2 g/l to 9 g/l and once more in September
2004 to 15 g/l
6
. Coincidentally, from 2003 onwards, the spot price for U rose by more than 1000 % from 10 US$/ lb
U
3
O
8
to a peak of 136 US$/ lb in June 2007 sparking questions on possible links between the two developments
7
.
In situations where radioactivity is not the only or the dominant stressor but acts in conjunction with other factors such
as malnutrition, air pollution, chemical and bacteriological water pollution, even larger knowledge gaps on health
effects through U exposure exist. This is of particular concern since U was found to be immunotoxic (adversely
affecting the immune system) observed in chicken lymphocytes exposed to low concentrations of uranyl nitrate (Shukla
et al. 2007). In view of the prevalence of HIV infections and AIDS in many of the mining towns of the study area
(following the outcomes of a medical investigation Carletonville was apparently dubbed the AIDS capital of South
Africa, L Stoch pers. Communication) such impact on humans could further strain the already compromised immune
systems of many residents. Other stressors particularly affecting poor communities in informal settlements include lack
of basic infrastructure incl. water and sanitation promoting the use of contaminated water from unsafe sources, poverty-
related stress, substance abuse and inadequate access to much needed health care. Under such scenarios safe U-levels
may need to be set significantly lower than those appropriate for less vulnerable populations elsewhere.
Employing a GIS
8
-based, spatial correlation technique Toens et al. (1998) found a statistically significant correlation
between U-concentration in groundwater from 69 boreholes (used as source of drinking water in this remote, arid
farming area) and high counts of abnormal lymphocytes in peripheral blood from 418 people (16 years and older)
sampled at 52 different locations in the Kenhard district west of the 20E meridian. These abnormal haematological
values have been linked to leukaemia, from which many residents of the area suffer and which was the very reason why
the study has been initiated by medical doctors from the University of Stellenbosch (Toens et al.(1998). Uranium, in
this area, mainly originates from uraniferous gneisses leading to concentrations in associated groundwater ranging from
10 g/l to a maximum of 478 g/l. These range is comparable to that found in the WFS. Reported cases of leukemia
occurred at farms with U-levels as low as 40 g/l -70 g/l (Toens et al. 1998)
9
. These levels are almost continuously
exceeded in most reaches of the WFS, in some instances by up to an order of magnitude. With over 300 g/l the average
U-concentration in the upper most WFS is almost three times higher than the average U-concentration in groundwater
of the Poffadder area.
Furthermore, U-peaks moving down the WFS are well above the maximum U-level found in the Poffadder
groundwater. Therefore, in cases where people in informal settlements may continuously use stream water as main or
even sole source of drinking water this could pose a significant health risk. An even greater risk exists for people using
water directly from mining sources such as canals. This is especially true for inhabitants of informal settlements with no
formal water supply, which were frequently observed to use untreated water (IWQS 1999, Barthel 2007). In some cases
such mine water exceeds levels observed in the Poffadder area by an order of magnitude. From a water user survey
conducted along the entire course of the WFS as part of the IWQS study it can be established that a minimum of some
350 people, at the time, were likely to be using untreated water directly from the WFS or from adjacent mine canals for
domestic purposes. For some of these people, polluted stream water or mine effluent was reported to be the only source
of water. Some 150 people living next to the Driefontein canal were reported to use untreated water directly from the
canal for domestic purposes (IWQS 1999). Other exposure pathways discernable from the survey include the use of
mine effluent and stream water for irrigating garden vegetables (for own consumption) and commercial crops as well as
for watering of livestock used for own consumption and commercial production. Another pathway along which U may
enter the food chain is the frequently encountered consumption of fish caught not only in the stream and its dams but
apparently also in mine water canals. For this exposure pathway alone annual doses exceeding the 1 mSv/a limit by up
to 180 % were calculated for all age groups except the 1-2 year old (IWQS 1999). In view of continued population
growth in the area since 1997 the number of potentially affected people has most likely increased, especially in lower

5
In case of the US-EPA the originally determined limit of 20 g/l was finally set at 30 g/l to cater for cost considerations in water treatment.
6
Maintaining the original TDI value of 0,6 g U/ kg x d this was justified by raising the assumed contribution of drinking water to the total U-intake
fromoriginally 10 % (i.e. assuming that 90 % of the U-intake comes fromother sources) first to 50 % and later to 80 % resulting in higher tolerable U-
concentration in drinking water since additional U-loads fromother sources have been reduced first to 50 % and later to 20 %.
7
Such link may relate to an 1959-agreement between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the WHO, which according to Bertell (1999)
constitutes a serious conflict of interest. It may constrain the work of the WHO by stipulating the following: ... whenever either organisation proposes
to initiate a programme or activity on a subject in which the organisation has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult the other
with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual consent (WHO 1999). Established by the United Nations in 1956 the IAEA was originally tasked to
prevent the proliferation of nuclear arms while promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy. However, according to Bertell (1999), since established the
promotional goals of the IAEA frequently took priority over regulatory aspects. This may explain why the U-limits set by the WHO were significantly
lowered twice during a comparably short period when more U-mining was needed to satisfy a growing global demand.
8
Geographical Information System
9
It must be noted that, according to Toens et al. (1998), despite a generally low residential mobility, migration across farmboundaries sporadically
occurs. In a follow up study for DWAF Wullschleger et al. (1998) established that groundwater with elevated U-levels was used for domestic purposes
in many more settlements of the N-Cape. Triggered by these report and a related article in the Cape Times (February, 1999) in April 1999 another
DWAF study was conducted sampling ten boreholes five times between April 1999 and August 2000 (Sekoko et al. 2005). Sekoko et al. (2005)
confirmed elevated radioactivity levels in some boreholes of the N-Cape while finding little or none in others and remained vague and inconclusive
regarding associated health risks.
778
and lowest income groups as most exposed and most vulnerable parts of the population.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Recent findings regarding the toxicity of U significantly extended the list of possible adverse health affects humans may
suffer as a consequence of prolonged exposure to above-background levels of U. Apart from the long-known
nephrotoxicity (kidney damage) on which the majority of international U-guidelines is based, a surge of research
triggered by the DU-related Gulf War Syndrome and newly available large cohorts of former uranium miners from
East Germany and the Czech Republic extended the list of possible adverse health effects of uranium significantly. Data
from animal experiments as well as epidemiological data now suggest that U may not only be nephrotoxic but also
neurotoxic (targeting the brain), genotoxic (causing DNA damage related to cancer), immunotoxic (weaken the immune
system) and disrupt hormone balances by mimicking estrogen at levels below currently existing drinking water limits.
This is of particular concern since drinking water limits for U in South Africa are well above international standards. Of
particular concern are findings of a 1997 South African study which links naturally elevated U-levels in domestically
used groundwater to increased incidences of hematological abnormalities related to leukaemia amongst residents of a
Northern Cape farming community. While causal relationships between ionizing radiation in general and leukaemia are
well established for above-average exposed populations such as of uranium miners, nuclear workers and lately also
residents of DU-contaminated war zones, no such link was previously reported for the drinking water pathway. In view
of these findings public concerns about uranium pollution in the WFS catchment are to be taken seriously even though
some concerns may have been exaggerated and sensationalized in the media.
All major sources of U-pollution in the study area are mining-related with U originating from auriferous ore (reefs)
where it is commonly associated with gold. Tailings deposits in the WR and FWR alone contain well over 100000 t of
U
3
O
8
constituting large, long-term reservoirs from which U migrates largely uncontrolled into adjacent environs. In
mined-out areas highly polluted acidic water flowing from flooded mine voids constitutes another major source of
waterborne U-pollution. Owing to a much larger void volume in the FWR, a similar uncontrolled decanting of mine
water as experienced in the Western Basin and unmanaged rewatering of the four dewatered compartments could have
drastic consequences for downstream water users such as the Potchefstroom Municipality. Owing to deepening projects
many gold mines recently decided to embark on, rewatering and associated impacts may, however, only realize in
several decades from now. This leaves sufficient time to address the issue of rewatering and its associated consequences
in a comprehensive and responsible manner.
While, for geological reasons, tap water in some areas of Canada and Scandinavia displayed higher U-maxima than
found in the WFS, the average level of pollution present over the entire length of the WFS is well above most
international guidelines and comparable to those found in groundwater of the Northern Cape (South Africa) which have
geostatistically been linked to abnormal hematological values related to leukemia. For a limited number of people,
especially those living in informal settings along the WFS, long-term exposure resulting from the continuous use of
untreated stream water or mine water (even though it may be illegal) cannot be excluded. However, owing to a
generally higher residential mobility for many of the migrant workers and job seekers duration of exposure may, on
average, be less. It also needs to be stated in this context that the overwhelming majority of residents in the WFS
catchment have access to good quality tap water provided by Rand Water and are thus much less, if at all, exposed to
polluted drinking water.
Considering all possible exposure pathways it is estimated that currently several hundreds, if not thousands, of mainly
poor people may be directly affected by water pollution at various degrees of intensity. Immediate intervention should
be considered for situations were polluted water is the only sources of drinking water and where such water finds its
way into the food chain of subsistence farmers either via irrigation of gardens or livestock watering. Such intervention
is particularly urgent, since the most exposed population is commonly the one most vulnerable. This is due to a range of
poverty-related stress factors including malnutrition, prevalence of infectious diseases related to sub-standard sanitation,
lack of medical health care and high HIV infection rates to name but a few. In view of the fact that U-pollution of
stream water is still ongoing and likely to continue for some time into the future intervention should preferably target
the habits, economic and living conditions of the most vulnerable groups. This should be based on an updated,
sufficiently detailed and comprehensive survey of people currently using polluted water in the catchment. It is believed
that this would be more effective in terms of health protection than currently suggested attempts of isolated clean-up
operations involving removal of polluted sediments from a few selected sites along the WFS (Ilisio Consulting 2008).
5. REFERENCES
Barthel R (2007): Assessment of the radiological impact of the mine water discharges to members of the public living
around Wonderfonteinspruit catchment area. BSA-project-no. 0607-03, BS Associates, Consulting Engineers and
Scientists, Report to the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR), contact no RRD/RP01/2006, Bedfordview, pp. 225,
unpublished
Bertell R (1999): Conflict of interest between IAEA and WHO. WISE News Communique on November 19,
www.antenna-wise.nl, accessed 9 Feb. 2009
779
Blyvooruitzicht (2008) Uranium concentration in water downstream and upstream of the discharge canal. Weekly
sampling, Feb. 2003 to J an. 2008, Blyvooruitzicht Gold Mine, Carletonville, unpublished
Busby C (2005): Does uranium contamination amplify natural background radiation dose to the DNA? Eur. J. Biol.
Bioelectromagn., 1, 120-131
Busby C, Schnug E(2008): Advanced biochemical and biophysical aspects of uranium contamination. In: De Kok LJ ,
Schnug E: Loads and fate of fertilizer-derived uranium. 11-22, ISBN/EAN 978-90-5782-193-6, Backhuys
Publishers, Leiden, pp. 241
Coetzee H, Wade P, Ntsume G, J ordaan W (2002): Radioactivity study on sediments in a dam in the
Wonderfonteinspruit catchment. DWAF-Report 2002, Pretoria
Coetzee H, Winde F, Wade P (2006): An assessment of sources, pathways, mechanisms and risks of current and
potential future pollution of water and sediments in gold mining areas of the Wonderfonteinspruit catchment
(Gauteng/ North West Province, South Africa). WRC report no. 1214/1/06, ISBN 1-77005-419-7, Pretoria
Dorling D (2008): Uranium concentration in the upper Wonderfonteinspruit. Monitoring results for the period February
2006 to J anuary 2008, 23 samples, unpublished
DWAF (Department of Water affairs and Forestry) (2004): Mooi River surveillance. Uranium analyses for selected sites
in the Mooi River catchment covering the period April 1998 to J uly 2004. Excel spreadsheet, unpublished
Henner P (2008): Bioaccumulation of radionuclides and induced biological effects in situations of chronuic exposure of
ecosystems - a uranium case study. In: De Kok LJ , Schnug E [eds]: Loads and fate of fertilizer derived uranium.
Backhuys Publishers Leiden, The Netherlands
Iliso Consulting (2008): Wonderfonteinspruit catchment area remediation plan. Report to Department of Water Affairs
and Forestry and National Nuclear Regulator, first draft, Nov. 2008, pp. 69, unpublished
IRSN (Institute de Radioprotection et de Surete Nucleaire) (2005): Envirhom: Bioaccumulation of radionuclids in
situations of chronic exposure of ecosystems and members of the public. Progress report 2 covering the period June
2003 September 2005. Report DRPH 2005-07 & DEI 2005-05. pp. 64
IWQS (Institute for Water Quality Studies) (1999): Report on the radioactivity monitoring programme in the Mooi
River (Wonderfonteinspruit) catchment. Report No: N/C200/00/RPQ/2399. DWAF Pretoria, pp. 26, unpublished
J acobi W, Roth P (1995): Risiko und Verursachungs- Wahrscheinlichkeit von extrapulmonaren Krebserkrankungen
durch die berufliche Strahlenexposition von Beschftigten der ehemaligen WISMUT AG, [Risk and probability of
causation of extrapulmonary cancers due to the occupational radiation exposure of workers at the previous
WISMUT Uranium Mining Company], 86 pages in German, GSF-Bericht 4/95, , GSF-Forschungszentrum fr
Umwelt und Gesundheit, Oberschleiheim 1995
J acobi W, Roth P, Noke D (1997): M Mgliches Risiko und Verursachungs-Wahrscheinlichkeit von Knochen- und
Leberkrebs durch die berufliche Alphastrahlen-Exposition von Beschftigten der ehemaligen WISMUT AG
[Possible risk and probability of causation of bone and liver cancer due to the occupational alpha ray exposure of
workers at the previous WISMUT Uranium Mining Company], 57 pages in German, Forschungsbericht, GSF-
Forschungszentrum fr Umwelt und Gesundheit , Oberschleiheim, J uly 1997
McDiarmid MA, Keogh J P, Hooper FJ , McPhaul K, Squibb K, Kane R, DiPinoR, Kabat M, Kaup B, Anderson L,
Hoover D, Brown L, Hamilton M, J acobson-Kram D, Burrows B, Walsh M (2002): Health Effects of Depleted
Uranium on Exposed Gulf War Veterans. Environm Research, 82, 2, 168 - 180
Raymond-Wish S, Mayer LP, ONeal T, Martinez A, Sellers MA, Christian PJ , Marion SL, Begay C, Propper CR,
Hoyer PB, Dyer AC (2007): Drinking water with uranium below the U.S: EPA water standard causes estrogen
receptor-dependent responses in femal mice. Environ Health Persp, 115, 12, 1711-1716
Schnug E and Hahneklaus S (2008): Dispersion of uranium in the environment by fertilization. In: Merkel BJ , Hasche-
Berger A (2008): Uranium, mining and hydrogeology. ISBN 978-3-540-87745-5, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 45-
52
Sekoko I, Mafejane A, Potgieter D, Conradie B, Kempster P, Khn A, Diefenbach A (2005): A survey on the
radiological and chemical quality of water resources in selcted sites of the Northern Cape province. Resource
Quality Service Report No. N/0000/GEQ0603, final report May 2005, pp. 61, unpublished
Shukla G, Chattopadhyay P, Singhal LK, Chaudhury P, Chuahan RS (2007): In vitro Evaluation of Uranium Induced
Immunotoxicity in Chicken Lymphocytes. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol., 2, 5, 473 - 480
Tempelhoff E (2007): Mynmonopolie se gru-moeras. Beeld, 2 February 2007, p. 11 (newspaper article)
Toens PD, Stadler W, Wullschlege NJ (1998): The association of groundwater chemistry and geology with atypical
lymphocytes (as biological indicator) in the Poffadder area, North Western Cape, South Africa. WRC report
839/1/98
Von Soosten C (2008): Stellungnahme der Beratungskommission der Gesellschaft fr Toxikologie e.V. (GT) zur
aktuellen Diskussion ber eine mgliche gesundheitliche Gefhrdung durch berschreitungen des Trinkwasser-
Leitwertes fr Uran. http://idw-online.de/pages/de/news279231, accessed 22.9.2008
WHO (1999): Agreement between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the WHO, ratified by the 12th
WHO-General Assembly, 28th May 1959, Resolution WHA 1240, Organisation mondiale de la sant, "Documents
fondamentaux", 42. edition, WHO, Geneva
William WA, Lane RG, Legator MS, Whorton EB, WilkinsonGS, Gabehart GJ (1995): Biomarker monitoring of a
population residing near uranium mining activities. Environ Health Perspect, 103 (5), 466-470
Winde (2000): U-concentrations in water from selected sites in South Africa. Analytical data, unpublished
780
Winde F (2006): Challenges for sustainable water use in dolomitic mining regions of South Africa a case study of
uranium pollution, Part II: Spatial patterns, mechanisms and dynamics. Physical Geography, 27, 2, 379-395
Winde F (2008): Peat deposits as natural uranium filters? - First results from a case study in a dolomitic gold mining
area of South Africa. In: Merkel BJ , Hasche-Berger A (2008): Uranium, mining and hydrogeology. Springer Verlag,
ISBN 978-3-540-87745-5, Berlin - Heidelberg, 499-514
Winde F (in press a): Uranium pollution of the Wonderfonteinspruit: 1997 2008. Part I: U-toxicity, regional
background and mining-related sources of U-pollution. Water SA, Ref. K3/6/2395, pp. 21 (14052 words)
Winde F (in press b): Uranium pollution of the Wonderfonteinspruit: 1997 2008. Part II: U in water concentrations,
loads and associated risks. Water SA, Ref. K3/6/2395, pp. 26 (14052 words)
WISE (2001): Uranium toxicity. http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/utox.htm, accessed: 1.6.2002
781